But Newt doesn’t come without some warts; many of them in fact. Most of us are aware of his serial marriages and some of the issues he had with ethics while serving as Speaker of the House during the Clinton Administration. However, if you are willing to dig a little deeper, there might be a few other issues that might cause one to pause.
A friend of mine sent me a link to a blogger than she reads quite frequently and he really does have a problem with some of the stances that Gingrich has taken over the years. In his post, the writer covers several topics that he feels make Gingrich not qualified to be the Republican nominee for President. (my take in italics)
- Campaigned for Nelson Rockefeller during the 1968 presidential elections. Anyone remotely familiar with the Rockefellers in general and Nelson in particular knows full well that no conservative could ever support such a candidate.
A little bit before my time, but I during some research on the Rockefellers, they do seem to have a bit of an elitist attitude towards most people. In fact, the Rockefellers could be the poster children for everything bad ever said about the Republicans.
- Is close friends with futurist and New Ager Alvin Toffler, who says that our Constitutional republic is “obsolete,” “oppressive,” and “dangerous to our welfare,” and that it must be “radically changed and a new system of government invented.” Gingrich admires Toffler so much that in 1994 he put Toffler’s The Third Wave on a list of “must reads” for Republican congressmen.
Support for Toffler confuses me a bit, I must admit. Why would someone who professes to be a proponent of smaller and less intrusive government be an admirer of someone who professes that our form of government is obsolete? Toffler is a big supporter of globalization and centralized control.
- Has been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations since 1990. The aforementioned Dr. Quigley (read the whole article PACNW Rights adds) said of the CFR that “[it] is the American branch of a society which originated in England … [and] … believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.”
Here Gingrich begins to look more and more like a Rockefeller. In one area that many elitist progressives and Republican believe is that they are smarter than the rest of us and need a centralized form of government to tell us how we should live our lives. If Gingrich truly believes in this, then we need to be very careful with any support given to him
- Has joined with Jeb bush in a push to provide amnesty to 12 million illegal immigrants (I suspect that number is a gross underestimate).
I’m not sure a blanket statement that Gingrich supports amnesty for illegal immigrants does his policy justice. Yes, it is true that Gingrich does not support rounding up all the illegals and shipping them home, wherever that might be. And if as a full-blown conservative this is your stance, then you will not agree with Gingrich. Gingrich’s plan is a little more nuanced than that. He feels, first and foremost, we need to get our borders secured. Then we work out something that accounts for the illegals in this country. Part of the plan does include making many of them head back to their native country. If they want to come back, then they need to have some sort of worker’s visa that is of limited duration. A lot of folks seem to forget that Ronald Reagan, the conservative icon, also signed a bill that essentially granted amnesty to several million illegal immigrants.
Doing something along these lines is what I could support. The first thing that has to happen is that our borders must be secured. I don’t care what the bleeding hearts have to say about it. We are a sovereign nation and we have the right to dictate who does and doesn’t enter our country. Once the border is secure, then work a program that allows these folks to come back to work those jobs that Americans supposedly won’t do.
- Is in favor of federal funding of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Inexcusable, as far as I am concerned. If an artist can’t support themselves with their art, then they need to go get a real job. I don’t feel we should have to pay for someone to depict Jesus get peed upon.
- Has frequently voted for the seizure of private property by the Federal government in the name of conservation. As a result, our D.C. overlords now own vast swaths of land in the Western part of our nation – and is using its ownership to prevent us from exploiting invaluable energy and mineral resources.
This might fall under the category of unintended consequences. Gingrich has stated often that he is a strong supporter of using our own energy resources to get us out from under OPEC thumb. While I certainly don’t support the taking of lands from their owners, whether it be outright stealing (eminent domain) or through legislation that prevents a landowner from using the land as they see fit (within reason), I’m not sure that Gingrich envisioned an administration so progressive as to not allow us to get those resources out of the ground, even at the cost of our blood and treasure. I am not excusing his behavior and his policies here, but rather knocking his foresight.
- Partnered with Nancy Pelosi to push for government intervention in energy development to prevent “global warming,” a theory that serious scientists no longer consider valid but which was wildly popular at the time. In fact, he recently said he would be willing to appear in a global-warming commercial with Al Gore because conservatives need to “present a solution.” Sorry Newt, but no solution is necessary when there is no such thing as anthropogenic (man-made) global warming.
Hindsight being what it is, I think the Gingrich is really sorry that he ever sat down on that couch with Princess Nancy. I do recall clearly cringing the first time I saw that commercial. What the heck was he thinking? There are times where I really think he tries too hard to be all things to all people. He would have been better off just sticking to his website and pushing for responsible extraction and use of our resources.
- Partnered with race-baiter Al Sharpton for more government intervention in education.
This dovetails with his support for the Education Department. When I think of DOE it really gives me the willies. What a perfect opportunity for a bunch of leftists and statist to mold our children’s minds. All this occurring away from the watchful eyes of their parents. But the DOE can’t bare all of the blame. Much of it rests on the shoulders of the educators themselves. I recall in the mid 1970s the beginning of the leftist takeover. We had to do several art projects on protecting the environment. We also had to read books by leftist authors like Salinger and Steinbeck. All of this was before the formation of the DOE. Also, parents have to share some of the blame. For many parents, dropping junior off at school is a break, a 7-hour babysitter paid through our property taxes. Rather than get involved with their children’s school, they abdicate authority to the teachers and the school boards.
I highly recommend that you read the entire article AND make sure you do your own research. While bloggers like myself and at the linked site can provide you with much information, it is ultimately up to you to confirm or refute the information provided.